PEP-57: GRIP Renewal

GRIP Report no. 1: first 30 days post renewal

The GRIP renewal proposal was approved 21 votes to 2 on April 7. This note covers the period from April 7-May 7.

Opt-in Assistance & Value Measurement

GRIP assistance is provided now only to those who request it, as stipulated in the renewal proposal. Under this opt-in model, three “customers” came calling.

All (two) pre-proposal authors during the period under review sought GRIP help and both rated the assistance they got as “very helpful.”

The author of a draft proposal who bypassed the pre-proposal stage and went straight to proposal, also sought GRIP feedback.

Here are the details:

  • @katerina, ops manager at Encode Club, asked GRIP to review her pre-proposal for a partnership that would see Pocket run bootcamp workshops on its tech. She dropped a link to a Google Doc with her pre-proposal in the #public-lobby of the Get a GRIP (GaG) Discord server and asked for GRIP to review it. I gave feedback via her Google Doc. She rated the assistance very helpful.

  • @crabman reached out to GRIP for input on the Relay Driven Inflation (RDI) pre-proposal, and said that @RawthiL’s feedback was very helpful.

  • @msa6867 specifically asked @shane and me for input on a reimbursement proposal. He made his request in the #public-lobby on the GaG Discord server. That much of the feedback (given in the #public-lobby) was incorporated into the proposal speaks to its utility. (Inferred) rating: helpful. (The DAO is not being billed for any work related to feedback by GRIP members on the proposal once it went live in the Forum).

Other Deliverables

A “GRIP Help” category was set up in the Forum Governance section. If you’re working on a proposal and want expert input, a visual aid or copy editing, this is the place to ask for it. Also, this is where authors should post the Google Doc links to pre-proposals and draft proposals for input by GRIP.

GRIP did not complete revisions to the PIP and PUP templates as none of our tech experts was available for this work during the period under review. GRIP expects to complete this work during month two.

One of the promised deliverables was to add info on GRIP to the Pocket docs section that covers proposals. This work, including necessary amendments to the existing section, will be done during month two.


New members: Although PEP-57 set out the steps whereby anyone can apply to join GRIP, no one did so during this period.

Confidential assistance: No one applied for private help from GRIP.

Live consultations: None requested.

Infographic work: None requested.

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill totals $1893, or about 38% of its available $5000 monthly budget. GRIP work is compensated at a base rate of $100 per hour; $150 per hour is paid for assistance that authors deem “very helpful.”

Here is the breakdown with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Rating Community Response Billed to DAO
GRIP Help Feedback on Encode Bootcamp pre-proposal very helpful
Feedback on msa reimbursement draft proposal helpful
Feedback on RDI pre-proposal very helpful 7 likes
Revise PEP template no feedback to date
GRIP setup GRIP Proposal Assistance infographic revisions n/a n/a
draft intro for GRIP Help category in Forum n/a n/a
create Google Sheet for tracking expenses, work and community feedback n/a n/a
devise template for monthly reporting on GRIP services and value assessment n/a n/a
GRIP admin Prepare and give March 8 presentation on initial 3-month trial (on “Office Hours”) n/a n/a
Draft report on first month of activity ending May 7 n/a n/a
GRIP expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription Jan-May 2023 $118

A small amount of the above work was done between February 22 and renewal approval on April 7; payment for that period is covered under the renewal proposal. As GRIP’s “infrastructure” gets progressively set up, set-up work can be expected to taper off moving forward.

Please let us know what you think. All comments are welcome.


Hi @zaatar

can you please expand more on the fees charged to the DAO related to GRIP setup and GRIP admin? How much are you charging for sharing this report with the community? And similarly for the office hours trial? These costs go directly to justifying the programme and it doesn’t feel right that such fees are uncapped, as without being accountable this programme would simply end.

Furthermore, from a personal perspective spending 50% of the monthly spend on internal admin seems very excessive. And I don’t think it’s right that the amount paid on admin should ever be more than c.10% of the funds spent on impactful work. Which would be $82.5 based on this month’s work.

As a reminder from the previous discussions:


@Dermot, thank you for your feedback, as always.

Bill Itemization

Here is the breakdown:

Who What Hours billed
Ale Infographic updates 2.5
Ale Expense sheet design and modifications 1.5
Zaatar Draft intro for new GRIP Help category in Forum 0.5
Zaatar Prepare and deliver review of GRIP output from November 22 to March 7 (on “Office Hours”) 2.5
Prepare report for DAO on GRIP re period ending May 7 2.5

Admin Costs

  1. Your comment reflects a misunderstanding of the “monthly” work breakdown. Half of the admin work relates to the period from February 22 to April 7, thereby reducing the admin total for Apr7-May 7 to 2.5 hours.

  2. This was GRIP’s first report since its adoption of an opt-in model and transition to global billing (no hourly breakdown of work by each GRIP member). There was no template for this report, which necessitated developing one including a work output/value assessment table. This template will serve us going forward; the work involved in creating it can be fairly characterized as “setup.” Accordingly, admin work for this report is hereby reduced from 2.5 hours to 1.5 hours and 1.0 hour is added to setup. (The table in the report above has been changed accordingly.) This drops the admin work for month one to $150, or 18% of the $825 bill for GRIP services.

  3. During this first month, there was little occasion for use of GRIP’s services: we used only 38% of our $5000 budget. Since admin costs will likely remain constant, an increase in “impactful” work will see a drop in the comparative cost of admin.

(Also, you refer to an Office Hours “trial.” No such thing. It was a review of GRIP’s first three months, its initial trial period, that was presented during Office Hours on March 8.)

While PEP-57 did not contain a hard cap for admin (just an aspirational 10%), I have billed for only a fraction of the actual time spent on preparing the reports, limiting fees to what seemed reasonable.

I trust that my response not only addresses your concerns but also demonstrates the transparency and accountability that define GRIP’s work on behalf of the DAO.


Have you reduced how much you’re charging to the DAO or have you just recategorised the expense? If it’s the latter, I don’t see the benefit in doing so, as it just makes it more confusing.

Never mind the $250 charged to the DAO to present on GRIP work to date, I still think charging $200 to the DAO to share a monthly report on $825 of work is excessive.

I appreciate the transparency, but the main reason for my pushback is that you are a talented contributor whom the ecosystem would benefit much more from if you reallocated your time, so that, for example, you spent 4.5 hours directly driving one of our key ecosystem metrics and only 30 mins reporting back to the DAO, as opposed to 5 hours of reporting (and potentially even more on admin that doesn’t result in any direct impact for the ecosystem).

The more time spent on impact v admin the better for all.


I have recategorized the expense, thereby reducing admin to $150 (not $200).

Totally agree that impactful contribution would better serve Pocket Network. I take no pleasure in admin - but someone has to do it.

1 Like

GRIP Report no. 2: May 7 - June 30

This is the second report on GRIP since its renewal was approved by PEP-57 on April 7. This report covers more than one month as PNF asked GRIP to report on its work to the DAO at the end of the calendar month for payment purposes. Publication of this report was delayed to await feedback on GRIP contributions during the period under review.

Assistance Requests

Over this period, there were five requests for GRIP help.

  • Ivan Jelic approached GRIP, noting that CompareNodes, of which he’s a co-founder, had an idea on how to benefit the Pocket Network ecosystem. Provided the options for modes of GRIP help, he requested we create a private channel on the GRIP Discord server. This was done May 16. Named #compare-nodes, he has not yet used it.

  • Addi asked for confidential help with Thunderhead’s Pokt Info reimbursement pre-proposal which was later floated as “PEP-61: Pokt Info Partial Reimbursement Request.” A private channel, #pokt-info, was set up on the GRIP Discord Server. Feedback (QSpider, zaatar) was given in this channel and via a live consultation in the Meeting Room on the GRIP Discord server. The contents of the #pokt-info channel have been made public.

  • Jack asked for GRIP feedback on ARR. Shane and MSA provided feedback. (MSA’s input was provided as part of the GRIP membership application process and therefore was not compensated.)

  • Ramiro sought GRIP feedback on MINT. MSA, a GRIP member by this point, provided it.

  • Shane asked for GRIP feedback on BASH. Ramiro provided it.

Feedback evaluation is set out in the chart below under “GRIP bill to DAO.”

Changes to GRIP Process

Experience during the period under review has shown that the process for provision of GRIP feedback to authors and the way this feedback is evaluated need fine tuning. What follows are proposed changes designed to protect DAO funds and improve the assessment of GRIP feedback.

Going forward, the author of a proposal will be requested to evaluate feedback on a scale of 0-10, zero being unhelpful and 10 being extremely helpful. The higher the rating, the greater the remuneration. Work that earns a 5 rating will be compensated at $100 per hour. A zero rating will not be compensated. Authors who assign a zero will be asked to explain this rating.

Further, an author might find that some feedback was unhelpful but not all. Here, authors will be asked to quantify the percentage of feedback provided that was unhelpful (zero rating). They will be asked to rate the remaining feedback overall from 1-10.

Where an author opines that the entirety of a GRIP expert’s assistance was unhelpful, further input will be sought from another member of the same GRIP team. The GRIP teammate can confirm the 0 rating or suggest a different rating. This recognizes that while an author may view the help as useless, the feedback in question may nonetheless be seen as helpful to the community. The GRIP member’s assessment will govern.

In addition, once a request for GRIP expert assistance is made, and a GRIP expert is chosen to provide it, that expert is authorized to perform TWO (2) hours of work. If the expert wants more time, an hour-specific request - up to a maximum of eight - will need to be made. The request must be approved by the author of the proposal and one member of the corresponding GRIP expert team. If the author fails to respond within 48 hours (excluding weekends), approval by the GRIP team member will suffice. Approval could be for all the hours requested or fewer hours. Additional hours devoted to feedback without prior approval will not be compensated, save in exceptional circumstances.

This tweak is meant to make GRIP members’ work more efficient and focused.

New members

MSA joined GRIP as a member of the economic experts team.

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill totals $1943.50. GRIP work is compensated at a base rate of $100 per hour; $150 per hour is paid for assistance that authors deem “very helpful.”

Here is the breakdown with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Community Response Amount Billed
GRIP Help Assist CompareNodes n/a n/a
Feedback on Pokt Info reimbursement preproposal very helpful n/a
Feedback on PUP-32: ARR pending 2 likes
Feedback on BASH preproposal very helpful
Feedback on MINT preproposal helpful (60% of feedback), unhelpful (40%) 6 likes
MINT copyediting helpful
GRIP Admin Prepare report on activity from May 7 - June 30
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription June 2023 $29.50

For the period under review, admin has been limited to 10 percent of the fees billed for GRIP help. Appropriate remuneration for admin will be reconsidered in a future report.


GRIP evolves with additional members and more transparency and caps on payments to become more cost efficient. :+1:

1 Like

GRIP Report no. 3: July 1-31

As befits the dog days of summer, GRIP was mostly idle in July.

Assistance Requests

In July, there was only one new pre-proposal, PNF (Payments Negating Favouritism). The author, Cryptocorn, requested GRIP help. (Cryptocorn is a GRIP member.)

Payment for Work on Pre-Proposals Posted Before July

MSA provided feedback (in July) on BASH.

Shane is due a bonus payment ($50) for his June input on ARR. Initially compensated at the standard pay-rate pending author evaluation, Jack (on behalf of PNF) belatedly gave a rating of “very helpful,” triggering the bonus.

Changes to GRIP Process

A slight change is being introduced to reduce friction: as set out below, a GRIP expert who wants extra feedback-hours approved, need get it only from the author or a GRIP member, not both, as set out below:

Once a request for GRIP expert assistance is made, and a GRIP expert is chosen to provide it, that expert is authorized to perform TWO (2) hours of work. If the expert wants more time, an hour-specific request - up to a maximum of eight - will need to be made. The request must be approved by the author of the proposal. If the author fails to respond within 48 hours (excluding weekends), approval can come from a member of the same GRIP team as the expert making the request. Approval could be for all the hours sought or fewer hours. Additional hours devoted to feedback without prior approval will not be compensated, save in exceptional circumstances.

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill totals $359.50. GRIP work is compensated at a rate of between 0-$150 per hour based on author value assessment on a scale of 1-10 (0 being unhelpful, 10 being very helpful). The median pay rate (work judged “helpful”) is $100 per hour.

Here is the breakdown for July’s bill with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Community Response Amount Billed
GRIP Help Feedback on BASH Helpful (50% of feedback) 4 likes
Unhelpful (50%)
Bonus payment for feedback on ARR Very helpful
Copy editing (PNF) Median pay rate
GRIP Admin Prepare report on July activity
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription July 2023 $29.50

For the period under review, admin has been limited to 10 percent of the fees billed for GRIP help. Appropriate remuneration for admin will be discussed in a future report.


GRIP Report no. 4: August 1-31

Assistance Requests

In August, there was only one new pre-proposal, Gandalf. The author, Shane, did not request GRIP help. Gandalf’s future is TBD. (Shane is a GRIP member.)

Ramiro, wishing to refurbish MINT based on prior feedback and get it launch-ready as a proposal, requested additional input and editing. Ramiro says he will put MINT up for a DAO vote when relays hit a regular daily level of at least 2 billion (or, if and when a significant deviation occurs between the ARR emission rate and that projected by MINT). (Ramiro, AKA @RawthiL, is a GRIP member.)

Work on Pre-Proposals Posted Before August

Ale dVG created an infographic for PNF (Payments Negating Favouritism). PNF now seems unlikely to go to proposal and voting. PNF was posted by Cryptocorn, a GRIP member.

Changes to GRIP Process

Just as hours for feedback by experts are capped, limits should also apply to editing and art work/infographics for any pre-proposal or other document.

Up to two hours of editing and artwork are automatically authorised upon an author’s request. The editor and graphic artist can ask for additional hours up to a total of 10. Additional hours requested by the editor must be approved by the author. Given the connection between infographics and proposal clarity, additional hours requested by the artist must be approved by the editor, or if the editor is unavailable within 48 hours, by the author.

In exceptional circumstances, extra hours (over 10) may be approved for editing, artwork or expert feedback, but this will require not only assent of the author (or editor in the case of artwork) but also that of two GRIP team members from the corresponding expert team (where applicable).

Clarity on GRIP compensation

GRIP work is compensated at a rate of between 0-$150 per hour based on author value assessment on a scale of 0-10: $0 for work scored 0, that is, deemed “unhelpful”; $20 per hour for a rating of 1-2, “somewhat helpful”; $100 per hour for a rating of 3-7, “helpful”; and $150 per hour for an 8-10 score, “very helpful”. An author might rate half of an expert’s feedback with a 6, the other half with a 2. Payment will be based on the average rating of 4. (For further payment considerations, please see GRIP Report no. 2, above.)

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill for August totals $2807.

Here is the breakdown with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Community Response Amount Billed
GRIP Help Feedback on MINT Helpful
Copy editing (MINT) Very helpful
Artwork (Payments Negating Favouritism) Very helpful
GRIP Admin Prepare report on August activity
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription August 2023 $29.50

For the period under review, admin has been limited to 10 percent of the fees billed for GRIP help. Appropriate remuneration for admin may be reconsidered in a future report.


Hi @zaatar could you please provide more of a breakdown on the expenses for this month. Speaking just for myself it is quite hard to assess the value and ROI here with the items bundled together, at least compared to a more open mechanism like a Socket. If we are paying $2500+ for proposals that are not moving forward we at least need some more granularity around what is being billed against each.

Also, while I’m not questioning the GRIP teams integrity, I do find the current situation of GRIP team members proposals being reviewed and billed by other GRIP team members as basically untenable. The number of proposals in the DAO has reduced dramatically and if that means the only user of GRIPs services are members of GRIP themself, the community should be revisiting whether this is solving a real need and is a good use of funds

1 Like

I agree that having GRIP members using GRIP services is not the best picture, but as you said, the number of proposals have go down and some of the most active members of the community happen to be also part of the DAO. I imagine that this situation will remedy itself if the community starts to grow again, right now is not the best season for independent builders.

Regarding the current billing, I must say that the work done on MINT is quite extensive and given the feedback on the previous version (unedited) it was necessary.
The history of all the copy-editing and feedback can be seen in this doc. Also the updated thread is public. MINT has not gone to voting because the number of relays does not justify the change, it can be put up to vote any moment.


Thanks for sharing. I generally agree and rather than pre-empt what comes next we can wait to discuss it when PEP-57 ends on the 31st of September.

I appreciate that I am in a position of bias, but I think that:

  1. If a pre-proposal doesn’t lead to a proposal and vote, it’s still valuable and should be allocated a certain amount of resources. Our proposal system has largely evolved into open discussion in the pre-proposal phase which helps shape proposals/educate the engaged community and/or show that a proposal wouldn’t be tenable at vote.

  2. While I agree with Ramiro and Ben that it isn’t the best look that it’s largely GRIP members writing proposals and then inviting the help of other GRIP members to critique, our system is set up that many of the most active and knowledgeable members are part of GRIP - as the Pocket experts, and so makes sense that they are the ones most likely to also write proposals. I’m guessing 80 - 90% of proposals outside of PNF are from GRIP members.
    So although there can be accusations of ‘dog-fooding’ the GRIP hours are now capped per proposal to stop excessive work being billed, and the alternative is to expect members to essentially do the critiquing or additional work for free, which I think would be a worse situation than compensating GRIP members for their expertise, which should allow for better proposals to be designed.

Who What Hours Author Evaluation Pay in $US
Ale infographic for Payments Negating Favouritism (PNF) 4.5 very helpful 675
zaatar MINT review, edit 17.6 (only 10 compensable) very helpful 1500
Cryptocorn MINT review, feedback 3.5 helpful 350
TOTAL 2525

Your comment reflects a misreading. As the August report makes clear and as Ramiro reiterates above, MINT is going forward as soon as conditions are ripe. Most of GRIP’s August help bill is for work on MINT.

Regarding “proposals that are not going forward,” my view is that GRIP should not do, and certainly not seek payment for, any work from the point where it becomes clear, if not doubtful, that a proposal is not going to proceed. Managing this issue requires oversight and close coordination between GRIP and proposal authors.

I agree with Cryptocorn that GRIP work on proposals that end up not being put to a DAO vote is nonetheless useful. For one, it demonstrates one of the benefits of GRIP, namely, it tests an idea in the community and can help demonstrate whether it’s worth pursuing. Second, GRIP feedback can enlighten others.

To better control spending in the case of pre-proposals that may die on the vine, only two hours of work are initially permitted by any GRIP member on any pre-proposal where help is requested. Any further hours up to a maximum of 10 (including the first 2) need the approval of the author or at least one other GRIP member.

(Following the submission of a bill in August for 4.5 hours of artwork, the two-hour rule was extended to artwork and editing.)

The fact is that GRIP experts are very active in the community and historically have authored, and continue to author, many proposals. Their proposals - and by extension, the DAO - benefit from the feedback of other GRIP experts, same as proposals by any other community member. As GRIP work - expert feedback, artwork and editing - is public or accessible, the value-add is visible to all; the community therefore can judge whether GRIP is providing a useful service to the DAO, even when those services are provided to GRIP members.

While GRIP members alone have used GRIP services over the last two months, a review shows that since GRIP’s inception last November, other community members have been the main beneficiaries.

Recipients of GRIP help prior to July:

Non-GRIP members:

  • PNF with ARR
  • Compare Nodes
  • Shedding Light Onto the Dark Forest pre-proposal by 0xMo0nR3kt3r
  • Addi/Thunderhead with PoktInfo reimbursement pre-proposal
  • Encode Bootcamp pre-proposal
  • MSA’s SER (before MSA joined GRIP)
  • @crabmans Relay Driven Inflation (RDI)
  • PoktScan’s Geo-Mesh Reimbursement pre-proposal (Jorge and Michael O’Rourke Sr.)
  • PoktBlade with Chocolate Rain and LeanPokt reimbursement pre-proposal

GRIP members:

  • Cryptocorn’s pre-proposals SALES and ACCURATE
  • Shane’s pre-proposal BASH

The recent drop in community involvement in proposal development may be due to the crypto-wide downturn and/or lower Pocket node-runner rewards and dismal token price. It’s a fair bet that market upturn will see more proposals from non-GRIP members and greater demand for GRIP help.

One of the main ideas behind GRIP was to promote and widen participation of community members in proposal creation. If community interest in proposal creation does not revive, what will that mean for GRIP? Should it evolve and adapt or go the way of the dodo? I will lay out my thoughts shortly. What do others think?


GRIP Report no. 5: September 1-30 and Review of Latest 6-Month Trial Period

At the end of the monthly review for September that follows, this post considers the entire GRIP experiment, focusing on the recent 6-month trial period.

This post does not end with a request for further renewal. Instead, it concludes with a request for community feedback. GRIP will mull its fate based on that feedback.

Assistance Requests

In September, there were no new pre-proposals. Although a few proposals were posted, no authors asked GRIP for help. However, PNF requested that GRIP provide infographics for its 3D Governance PGOV1 - Evolving Pocket’s Governance: Introducing 3D Governance - Foundation - Pocket Network Forum proposal (posted in August). The infographic work was done in September (Ale, Cryptocorn and zaatar).

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill for September totals $909.50.

Here is the breakdown:

What Details Author Feedback Amount Billed
GRIP Help Infographic (3D Governance) Helpful
GRIP Admin Prepare report on September activity and review of 6-mo. trial period
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription September 2023 $29.50

GRIP Comprehensive Review

GRIP’s six-month trial period ended October 7, 2023. Its first trial period lasted three months, November 2022 to March 2023.

As detailed below, GRIP did achieve its main goals:

  1. create a system to compensate community experts for the time they take to provide meaningful feedback on technical and economic proposals;
  • The feedback and other help provided by GRIP was, with few exceptions, rated helpful or very helpful. No compensation was sought or awarded for unsolicited expert feedback by non-GRIP members. The one non-GRIP member who had requested the community to pay for unsought feedback joined GRIP, thus helping to entrench the process for compensation only for pre-requested feedback on pre-proposals and proposals.
  1. help proposal preparation including by first timers, thereby broadening community participation;
  • GRIP did assist with proposal preparation including for several first timers (as detailed in post dated September 19, immediately above).
  1. make proposals clearer and easier to grasp and thereby help DAO members understand proposals requiring their vote, thereby enhancing governance;
  • GRIP editing improved proposals and made them easier to understand, including via infographics (3D Governance and Payments Negating Favouritism).

This observation, made in August, is valid. Only if demand for its services by community members outside GRIP resumes would it make sense to renew GRIP in its current form.

Goodbye GRIP?

Community proposal activity has dropped, in part due to PNF taking over most of the work in the ecosystem.

Has the time has come for GRIP to say goodbye? Take a pause? Or reinvent itself?

Areas Where GRIP Services Can Meet a Need

GRIP brings proven community expertise, editing and artistic skills that can complement those of PNF and individual builders. Here are four areas where GRIP, or some reformulation of GRIP, could continue to meet real needs:

  • Work on community-related proposals and publications by PNF

GRIP has shown that it can provide value-add to PNF proposals and other documentation. It has provided editing and infographics, most recently on 3D Governance. PNF, and by extension, the community would benefit from the continuation of such assistance.

  • POP work

Moving forward, we can expect the big contributions to the Pocket ecosystem to be in the form of Pocket Open Priorities or POPs. POP authors competing for PNF-funded work could tap GRIP’s services, including technical expertise, to strengthen their proposals. Or, once a contract is awarded, depending on the nature of the work, GRIP members could help with editing and artwork/infographics (e.g., website redesign). Contract applicants or winners could pay for this work or it could be covered or subsidized by the DAO based on the reasoning that POPs resemble proposals whose refinement (pre-selection) and implementation (post-selection) benefit the ecosystem at large.

  • DAO voting

As long as the Pocket network continues, the DAO will be asked to vote on proposals including those advanced by PNF, such as those related to 3D Governance. Hence, there will always be a need for editing and occasional infographics to make proposals clearer.

  • Community Proposals

While community proposal activity has declined, it has not stopped completely. Not surprisingly given their high level of Pocket knowledge and expertise, GRIP members have continued to author proposals and pre-proposals over the last few months - e.g., Shane’s GANDALF (Decrease Maximum Chains), Bulutcambazi’s PIP-31 (Unleashing the Potential of POKT) and Cryptocorn’s Regulating Sockets (REGS). In future, community members outside GRIP might also come up with proposals and pre-proposals.

The community benefits when these undergo expert review, editing and occasionally, addition of infographics, even when the author is a GRIP member. While the optics of GRIP getting paid to help other GRIP members could be better, the benefit to the community justifies the provision of this assistance. (GRIP help was not requested for GANDALF or PIP-31.) To improve the optics, the hourly pay-rate for GRIP help to other GRIP members would top out at $100 (in a possible renewal proposal); there would be no bonus for work deemed “very helpful.”


In sum, there remains a need for editing and, occasionally, artwork to make all votable proposals more digestible. In addition, GRIP’s services, including its expert feedback. could be leveraged in new ways.

GRIP was a grassroots community initiative, reflective of Pocket’s decentralized ethos. Now that the number of independent node runners has dropped, an entity like GRIP can help keep the decentralization flame burning.

Your Input, Please

GRIP needs to hear what the community thinks before determining whether to close its doors, seek renewal, or reformulate itself.

In the meantime, GRIP will continue to provide assistance if requested. Payment for any such work will be requested - and put to a vote - once GRIP decides on its future by year’s end or sooner.

(Before its fate is decided GRIP could be asked to do infographic work. For now, therefore, it will maintain its Adobe Illustrator subscription at a cost of $29.50 per month.)


I appreciate that I may be biased as a GRIP member, but I think GRIP should continue.

It incentivises some of the best and brightest in our community to expend effort into building better proposals that help the whole ecosystem. Without GRIP, I think there’s a strong argument that submitted proposals will be of lower value and benefit for Pocket.

As Zaatar points out- GRIP is pay per use, so if it’s not utilized, the cost of keeping it open and available is very small.

Lastly, anyone can demonstrate their expertise and apply to join GRIP, making it an available opportunity for members of the community to join and be meritocratic.


Grip should continue at least until the protocol is mature enough.

1 Like

GRIP is now a waste of funds, especially since the number of proposals has dropped and PNF has things under control. Both the community and investors can voluntarily review the proposals, as doing so is in their best interest. GRIP should be discontinued to save DAO funds.

GRIP To Be Mothballed

GRIP, or Group to Review and Improve Proposals, began operations in November 2022 and made its final contributions to the Pocket Network in September 2023. At that point, GRIP announced that it would suspend operations and canvass community views on whether it should shut down or continue.

Opinions - the few that were expressed - were mixed.

In its last report, GRIP had offered to provide assistance in Q4. None was sought.

GRIP’s subscription to Adobe Illustrator was kept active to accommodate potential help requests. The subscription has now been cancelled. The DAO is being billed $88.50 for the subscription in Q4 ($29.50 per month).

Editing and Infographic Service Under Consideration

While ecosystem changes have diminished the demand for expert feedback on proposals, there continues to be a need for editing and infographics.

As long as the DAO votes on proposals, including those advanced by PNF, there’s a need for editing and occasional infographics to make proposals clearer. In addition, GRIP’s proven editing and artistic skills can be tapped by PNF, individual builders and other community contributors to improve any output, including blogs.

An initiative, therefore, may launch soon, possibly as a Socket, to provide such support. Stay tuned.

But GRIP will disband for now. PNF will be requested to remove the GRIP Help subcategory under Proposals in Pocket Network’s Discourse, as well as reference to GRIP in the pre-proposal support channel on the Pocket Discord server. Should demand for expert assistance revive, GRIP could be reconstituted and this infrastructure taken out of the mothballs.


Thanks for your work and help zaatar. Appreciate the thoroughness of what you’ve done, and hope to see a need for this in the future with new governance and increased engagement.

I’ve removed the GRIP proposal in discourse and discord for now.

Thank you!

1 Like